T. Pryor in the 2009 Rose Bowl
Holdin' The Rope does a UFR-style breakdown of Pryor's game. He definitely played well but they did not "air it out" and the 37 throws are a little decieveing with so many swing passes. I hope they keep playing Lloyd-ball because we all know that can lead to some horrible defeats.
Depriest down to 3: Bad Guys (OSU); Florida, Bama.... CRAPOLA
Just to be clear (1) I couldn't post this elsewhere but thought it was notable; and, (2) I found this on a google search, I don't have Scout or Rivals
He was good, but not great. It's that damn lights-out defense of theirs, they just do not not give up much.
That's what makes 'tressell ball' so successful. When year in, year out you've got a defense that's giving up 10-14 pts/game, you can afford to play a bit more conservative.
"Lloyd-ball" really didn't lead to many bad loses other than to the Domers. We got beat by more talented USC teams, but I don't think that had to do with style of play as much as those USC teams were extremely talented. I think it helped us stay in games more than it cost us games and his thought process wasn't that far off base. Would I have liked to see them open it up a bit more at times, yes, but I think people put it in a much more negative light then it deserves. We won in 1997 playing "Lloyd-ball." OSU won their MNC playing "Tressel-ball."
I understand conservative football isn't too popular around these parts, but it's not automatic death. And I dare say OSU may have been worse last year hadn't they been so conservative. Perhaps next year conservative isn't the right move like you say, but one good game in a bowl isn't going to change my opinion that drastically on what I think is best for Pryor and company. If they open it up in big ten play and are killing teams like in 06 then I'll be worried about them not playing "Lloyd-ball"
"Lloyd-ball" really didn't lead to many bad loses other than to the Domers.Your ability to forget The Horror is much better than mine. And any games against Oregon. And many others I don't want to try to remember.
It was a result of terrible safety play and bad special teams. Bad defense was not part of "Lloyd-ball". He put that team in a position to win that game many times. Giving up big plays killed us. Hart's injury hurt us. Being aggressive in those situations may have completely back fired as well, we don't know. What happened in the horror and the next game were for different reasons than just conservative play calling
I've got to agree with you. I think Lloydball definitely led to some games against inferior opponents (the '02 Utah game comes to mind) being closer than they should have been, but other than those, which more often than not ended up in wins, Lloydball was, at the bare minimum, not a failure. I'm 100% pro-RR, but we've seen how opening up the offense (i.e., ramping up the number of possessions per game) can have negative consequences when the personel and/or execution aren't there.
Then again, I guess it's easy to declare Lloydball a success in retrospect! Lloydball or not, whatever philosophy leads to excellence on the field is alright in my book...after all, excellence is good.
Lloyd-ball depended on having a good D to be able to play conservative. It also relied on steady special teams plays. When you keep giving up huge plays, playing tight and hoping for the D to step up was a detriment to the team.
We were happy to punt from the 50, pin them back inside the 15 and then wait for them to make a mistake or punt and focus on winning the field position war.
The Horror sucked. We shouldn't lose to teams like that. Oregon was a different story. They ran a offense that we had no success at stopping and had two of the best players in the country on their team. If DD stays healthy, I think Oregon wins the MNC that year. We were flat out out-talented with Hart gimpy and Henne's shoulder basically falling off.
While Lloyd ball didn't alone account for the loses, it was a part of the sum when it came to that season.
W's=122 L's=40 Win%=.75309
I'll take that any day of the week and twice on Saturdays.
I'd say yes there were some bad/close losses that should of never had happened. I always loved knowing that teams knew UM was going to run the ball (rock,rock,rock) and there was no way they could stop it. Also watching Wisconsin do that to UM (last year)made me realize how much other teams/fans had to hate UM in the days when the team was really humming.
I agree with your comments 100%, but I think you should of paid better attention in English class.
How many times can I post this. Against Oregon, Henne didn't go down with injury until the 2nd half. We were down by 4 touchdowns at the end of the 1st half. And a "gimpy" hart managed to rush for 127 yards. Both injuries didn't have any impact on the game. We lost that game when the score was 32-7 at the half. We had horrible play calling and were outcoached, not out-talented, in that Oregon game.
OSU was conservative last year becasue Pryor is not a good QB and their defense was good enough that they didn't have to open the playbook up, not because they like being conservative. I would think if they were content running Lloyd-ball, they wouldn't have gone out and put all of their eggs in another spread QB's basket.
And Oregon disagrees that Lloyd-ball doesn't lead to bad losses. So does Appy State, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Minnesota.
Edit: beaten to the punch
Regardless of style of play. And as I said above, the horror wasn't because of so called "Lloyd-ball." At WVU, RR lost to a Pitt team that wasn't as good, I guess "Rich-ball" doesn't work. USC lost to Oregon State, apparently "Pete-ball" sucks too. Not to mention, well, every coach that is currently coaching college football.
And for every loss you, I can easily say a win. And most of our losses were not due to "Lloyd ball", but simply not playing as well in that game. The philosophy of "Lloyd-ball", conservative and run the football, is a perfect philosophy, when it works, just like all other systems. It's just easier to hand pick some loses that may have been helped had we been a little less conservative rather than look at wins and realize if we would have been more aggressive and maybe had some turnovers or worse field position because of it, we would have lost.
I do agree OSU would like to be less conservative probably, no where did I say otherwise. I think they ran the offense they did because that was what was best for the team. I don't think, however, Pryor is "not a good QB." I think he's overhyped, inconsistant, and not the best thrower, but I would still like to have him on our roster right now (though the whole everybody kills thing was a bit too much).
So he is a good QB, just overhyped, inconsistant, and a poor thrower? What makes him a good QB then (and I mean "good QB," not "good guy who takes snaps from the center.")? Aren't consistancy and accuracy the 2 most important things to being a good QB?
Also, in the Appy State game, we went up 14-7 and then shit the bed in the second quarter. No possible way Appy State should rattle off 21 unanswered points. Every possession we had in the first half (other than our 2 minute offense at the end of the 1st half) featured a rushing play on 1st down. That is the definition of Lloyd ball and is the reason we were down by 11 midway through the 3rd quarter. We didn't actually start opening up the playbook until we absolutely had to because we were down by 11. Maybe you and I have different ideas of what Lloyd-ball is, but that is my exact definition.
And wasn't always the best passer. QB isn't just passing the ball though, it's making plays. TP makes plays like it or not. He also makes mistakes, too many. He isn't a great QB, but he isn't bad either.
As for your horror reasoning, I like how you make up facts. Michigan actually passed twice out of 12 first downs before that 2-minute drive. That percentage isn't high, but when your rushing average on 5.8 ypc on first down, yeah, not much reason to pass more than that. Understand, Michigan had the best left side o-line in the country and Mike Hart, App. St. was smaller. So yeah, I'm sure most coaches in that situations would say, "Hey, we're only getting 6 yards a pop, we need to switch things up." Tell that strategy to RR, he'll probably laugh at you. When running works, do it. In case you forgot, "Lloyd-ball" put up 32 points that game despite 2 turnovers on downs a 2 missed field goals. We had 6.2 ypc for 246 yards. So "Lloyd-ball" apparently wasn't that conservative, going for it twice on 4th down and executing the offensive game plan successfully, but lost us the game? No. I would say ill-timed penelties, bad defense, and a poor passing percentage, combined with about all possibile negatives that could have happened, lost that game. Not running successfully on first down.
I understand conservative football isn't too popular around these parts
Are you kidding?
People went crazy over our conservative play. I remember people (idiots) being pissed off Lloyd would run a draw on 3rd and 25. But yeah, maybe my sarcastic meter isn't working, but if your serious, conservative football wasn't the most popular around these parts.
Yeah I hear you, I was also someone who clammered for a more exciting offense, you're right. However, what I mean to say is that there are more than a few people who would kill to have that old Lloyd-Ball back rather than be going through what we are right now. All the people who were against "this gadget offense that could NEVER work in the Big 10." You don't think that MOST of the old-schoolers never wanted a spread offense? Big 10 country LOVES the pro-style conservative offense.
I just pray to GOD that we are good soon because I really enjoy watching this offense, and I don't want to go through another transition and suck for 4-5 years straight.
Anybody other than me think "WTF??" anytime Pryor and Heisman are in the same sentence?
I had a debate with an OSU friend of mine recently, and he honestly thought that TP was one of the Heisman frontrunners for 2010. I replied, "He couldn't even beat Purdue, and OSU barely beat Navy in the Shoe!" Gotta admit it, pwnage doesn't get much better then that, IMHO.
No different than last year. he'll be a front-runner in the pre-season, but will quickly face off the list once a few games are on the books.
You are not dissimilar to some of the colonist to the North America, clinging to the past and looking eastward across the ocean to the motherland, unable to see the forest for the trees.
Me, I am a majestic visionary, breaking the ties that bind with the wretched motherland and heading westward into a glorious future
Michigan; Champions of the West.
That was fun, excuse me for a bit, I have to go clean up the dog shit
Yep. Even Phil Steele has him as his favorite to win the Heisman. I wouldn't even have him on my top 10 watchlist. He's not even a top 10 QB IMHE. He had the same passer rating as Forcier last year, with a better Oline and receivers. The only thing is he's a good runner, so that has to count for something.
I believe it was the 2010 Rose Bowl. Pryor is making progress but definitely has a way to go.
Tressell has worked 'lloyd-ball' to 5 straight conference titles and 5 straight BCS bowls. The only 'bad' loss in those 5 years is to Purdue last year. In 2008 they lost to PSU who went 11-2. In 2007 they lost to Illinois who went 9-4, and in 2005 they lost to PSU who went 11-1.
The difference between 'tressell-ball' and 'lloyd-ball' is tressell's defenses for the most part have been much better then Carr's were the second half of Carr's tenure at UM.
Pryor is like the President in that he gets all the praise for when things go well and all the criticism when they don't. To be perfectly honest I have yet to see him play to the level he was hyped at. Every year he is also hyped as a Heisman candidate but his numbers are far from even close to one. Although the Buckeye faithful continously point to Vince Young's college career as Pryor's path as well. So in that case we shall see this season, as the Bucks finally have a seasoned D and O at the same time. Can they lay it all on the line and really be something special and in the process can Pryor live up to his hype?
Sure would be sweet if UM can go into Columbus and shut all of them up for a year.
Quarterbacks tend to get better with experience, why some people cannot envision Pryor making a big improvement this season, is mind numbing. Take our very own Johnny Navarre and his progression from freshman to senior, he made a huge advance.
Pryor still has 1/2 his college football career to go, I will be surprised if he isn't first team all Big Ten. Devin Gardner has a wonderful upside and people on this blog recognize it and look forward to seeing Devin progress, but Terrel Pryor, because he is a buckeye is doomed to stagnancy. It is 7:50 in the morning people; time to smell the coffee
Making progress isn't having your passer rating drop 20 points from your freshman to soph year and honestly his stats were about equal to Tates freshman season. I watched almost every Buckeye game this year because I live in Ohio unfortunately, and there is no way you can legitimately argue that TP should be in the Heisman race. Now he could still improve, there is always that chance, but one decent performance in the Rose Bowl shouldn't propel him to Heisman status IMO..
that the HT is a popularity contest? TP has had two seasons of hype, coming off of a BCS win where he played well and going into 2010 ranked #2 in the polls. Everyone knows most players need a year of "introduction" to win the HT, TP has 2. Of course he will be on a lot of "short lists" coming into the year, who else would it be? The 3rd year starting QB, former #1 recruit, for one of the MNC favorites? Stats do not win the HT, ask any Qb from Lubbock, Hawaii or the Wac in general.
TP (true soph) 2009
| 167 | 295 | 2094 | 56.6 | 7.10 | 76 | 18 | 11 | 22 |
128.91 |
|
203 |
311 | 2542 | 65.3 | 8.17 | 58 | 30 | 6 | 18 | 161.91 |
Troy Smith (senior) 2006
Yes, great TD-int ratio for Troy but I think TP could put up similar stats, 2500ish yds passing, 25-10 type of ratio. Would that be HT finalist worthy? For a top 5 team, yes. A #25 team? Nope. That is the nature of the award, "best player for the best team" type of deal. If TP puts up those stats, 2500, 25-10 and OSU is 1 loss or undefeated, he is a HT finalist no question. Win it? I don't think so, not unless he goes nuts and puts up 30+ tds total. Whether you think that type of progression is possible is a different issue. We will have to wait and see.
You are missing an important factor for QB progression - QB smarts. He has all of the talent in the world, yet something holds him back. I really have to attribute that to his QB IQ.
Actually I don't even like these arguements. Team game. Doesn't really matter to me what Pryor does, as long as we kick OSU's ass.
Oregon's defense was really bad last year. Throwing for 266 yards on 37 passing attempts isn't a huge accomplishment.
LOL, whats his record as a starter again? Something like 20-4.
Yeah, he sucks.
Lets hear everybody's preseason top-5 Heisman list if its so foolish to put TP on there.
its foolish to put TP on it, but I think he trails a couple people.
Dion Lewis
Ryan Williams
Mark Ingram/Trent Richardson
Case Kennum
Ryan Mallett
My guess is a RB wins it this year. QBs seem to be a little down and we should see a bunch of prolific rushers.
I cant argue that list one bit. Some of my favorite players to watch are on it.
Love Lewis and Williams
Love the sentiment on Keenum. I'm all for him being included.
All I ask when people around here bitch and moan about other people's projections is to provide their own. Otherwise, its just complaining and whining.
Thanks for showing the way
I don't think Kennum will get alot of consideration because they won't be nationally relevant, but he should put up huge numbers. Same with Mallett. I can't really figure out a top 10 team with a QB that will put up great numbers.
Thats why I think Pryor will be in the discussion but won't be really considered. Should be on a top 10 team and comes with a bunch of hype.
But like I said, theres alot of good rushers like James at Oregon, Devine at WVU, and Rodgers at Oregon St. Should be fun to watch.